On December 6, 2012, Edokeda Trading Ltd. filed a civil lawsuit in United States District Court (Case Number: 2:2012cv07481) under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Consumer Fraud Act as well as other federal and state laws against Merchant National, LLC (MN), Pa Scout Ltd. (PS), and Manpreet Singh, the Founder and Chief Operating Officer of the two aforementioned companies.

Saint-Petersburg, Russia (PRWEB) January 07, 2013

NEW YORK, NY, JANUARY 2, 2013 – On December 6, 2012, Edokeda Trading Ltd. filed a civil lawsuit in United States District Court (Case Number: 2:2012cv07481) under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Consumer Fraud Act as well as other federal and state laws against Merchant National, LLC (MN), Pa Scout Ltd. (PS), and Manpreet Singh, the Founder and Chief Operating Officer of the two aforementioned companies. See Edokeda Trading Ltd. v. Merchant National, LLC et. al. 2:2012cv07481, Verified Complaint at 1-13 (2012). Through the lawsuit, Edokeda demands judgment against MN, PS and Singh, jointly and separately, on nine counts, and seeks compensatory and punitive damages, plus pre and post-judgment interest and costs for waging the lawsuit (According to the complaint pages 11-12).

In the filed complaint in federal district court, Edokeda Trading alleges that Merchant National, Pay Scout and Chief Operating Officer Manpreet Singh have engaged in a pattern of willful misrepresentation, allegedly made fraudulent claims related to the alleged withholding of funds to cover up the defendants intention to misappropriate Edokeda's funds (According to the complaint pages 1-13).

In the plaintiff's verified complaint they alleged that in March 2012, Edokeda Trading Ltd. contracted Qwipi, a Chinese company, to provide payment integration software for processing credit card transactions to a merchant account controlled by MN and PS, who in turn agreed to facilitate these transactions and remit funds to Edokeda (According to the complaint). The complaint further alleges that MN, PS and Singh provided all merchant support for Edokeda, and Edokeda dealt exclusively with individuals from these companies in processing high-risk credit card transactions (According to the complaint).

Edokeda further alleges that on September 7, 2012, MN and PS halted the processing of transactions for Edokeda, seized all funds in Edokeda’s merchant account, totaling tens of thousands of dollars, and failed to provide adequate assurances or explanations for their conduct (According to the complaint pages 2-4). Plaintiffs detail in the background allegation that Edokeda immediately demanded an explanation from Singh, who stated that transactions had been put on hold due to supposed chargebacks and that payment would be made shortly (According to the complaint). Edokeda contacted customers but found no instances of chargebacks, as all products had been delivered to the clients' satisfaction (According to the complaint). Some of the chargebacks claimed were dated more than 120 days in the past, and were effectively expired (According to the complaint). Although Mr. Singh later claimed that chargebacks for non-delivery of products could be effected up to 540 days after the transaction, VISA's rules set an absolute limit of 180 days (According to the complaint). Not surprisingly, Merchant National and Pay Scout refused to provide details on the chargebacks claimed (According to the complaint). Edokeda later found evidence linking the acquiring bank with Singh's companies even though he had previously denied all knowledge of this relationship (According to the complaint).
The complaint further alleges that it is patently clear that the defendants engaged in a scheme of fraud to obtain Edokeda's merchant account funds (According to the complaint pages 4-5). The complaint further alleges that the defendants engaged in criminal mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343 to carry out their scheme of fraud (According to the complaint pages 3, 7 and 9). The defendants fraudulently misrepresented to Edokeda that funds would be processed and paid out, however, defendants only ever intended to seize Edokeda’s funds (According to the complaint pages 1-13). Defendants fraudulently claimed non-existing chargebacks to avoid paying Edokeda which resulted in wrongly terminating Edokeda’s merchant services shortly after inquiries were made to the defendants (According to the complaint pages 2-4). Last, MN, PS and Singh ignored Edokeda’s requests for information, and mislead Edokeda executives to believe that their funds would be released to them when Singh and his companies never intended to release the funds (According to the complaint pages 1-13).

Edokeda is represented by Michael Camarinos of the New York and New Jersey based law firm, Mavroudis, Rizzo & Guarino. See Edokeda Trading Ltd. v. Merchant National, LLC et. al. 2:2012cv07481, Verified Complaint at 1-13 (2012).

Founded in 2011, Edokeda Trading is a wholesale supplier for many of the largest supplement, functional food, and beverage manufacturers around the world. We are committed to offering the world's highest quality, leading-edge nutraceuticals, delivered with a commitment to the highest safety and quality standards. Edokeda invests significantly in research, technology development, and commercial production, as well as the introduction of innovative nutritional ingredient products. Edokeda Trading is a new leader in the manufacture of PS, A-GPC, and other leading-edge specialty dietary supplement, functional food, and medical food ingredients, that offer exciting, science-based health benefits for people of all ages. See http://www.edokeda.com (2012).